Narrative:

We received our sea-las pre departure clearance. Both of us followed SOP in receiving the clearance; writing it down; and I; as the captain; checked the clearance; crosschecked the pre departure clearance against the flight plan; and also against the programmed route. Both of us misread the pre departure clearance and failed to make note of a SID change. A contributing factor was the pre departure clearance SID change was delivered in a nonstandard format (in my opinion). We were flight planned with the summa 6 departure; takeoff on runway 34. We were given the summa 6 on pre departure clearance; then 'cleared as filed' (./.); but that was changed in the comment section; page 2; to the seattle 3 departure. We failed to notice this comment. We flew the summa 6; turned at 8 DME to a 070 degree heading. At about the same time; the controller gave us a 090 degree heading. The controller noticed we were already in the turn and asked us which SID we were assigned. After checking and rechking the pre departure clearance; we finally realized our mistake. The controller informed us there were no conflicts. Operations manual states that clearance delivery 'can use additional free text fields' to add information such as 'call 10 mins prior' or to 'add an edct (flow or release time).' nothing about route changes in the 'free text field.' in regards to any changes to the filed route; it states that '...both the originally filed route and the revised route will be displayed on the pre departure clearance printout. The new route will be annotated using dashes ('-') both before and after the new route....' our pre departure clearance printout looked like this: 'page 1: sea MD83/west P 1753 429 330 sea summa 6 summa lkv ./. Las -- page 2: seattle 3 departure maintenance 9000 exp req altitude 15 NM after takeoff etc.' obviously in hindsight we should have noticed the seattle 3 in the comment section. Neither of us were rushed. Neither of us were cutting corners. There were no distrs. I feel like I was giving all due diligence to do a safe and conservative job. We both saw the summa 6; which I have flown almost every time I have ever flown northbound on runway 34 and which we had filed on our clearance page and; most importantly; we both saw the 'cleared as filed' slash mark below it (lkv ./. Las); and no dashes. I guess that settled the routing clearance in my mind. That doesn't explain my not reading the comment line; except subconsciously; I suppose; I felt the clearance was established on page 1 and I just went straight to what I expected next which was the 'maintain 9000 ft...etc.' it is my recollection; and it is supported by my reading of the fom that SID changes are to be placed between route change 'dashes.' if SID's are exempt from this requirement; then maybe that should be explained in the fom. If they are not; then sea clearance should make it SOP to place the SID between the dashes to assist us in recognizing important changes to our route of flight. That is why the dash format is used; I assume. Since verbal language is not used; misunderstanding of text is minimized by always placing changes between the dashes; and not in some other place in the pre departure clearance. That being said; I missed the text line; and for that I feel profoundly stupid. I have always felt I take my time reading the pre departure clearance and to miss a clear line of text like that is perplexing. I will re-dedicate myself to reading the pre departure clearance slowly line by line. I would request that all route changes from ATC be placed between the dashes to call attention to the change.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MD80 FLT CREW FLIES THE WRONG SID FROM SEA.

Narrative: WE RECEIVED OUR SEA-LAS PDC. BOTH OF US FOLLOWED SOP IN RECEIVING THE CLRNC; WRITING IT DOWN; AND I; AS THE CAPT; CHKED THE CLRNC; XCHKED THE PDC AGAINST THE FLT PLAN; AND ALSO AGAINST THE PROGRAMMED RTE. BOTH OF US MISREAD THE PDC AND FAILED TO MAKE NOTE OF A SID CHANGE. A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR WAS THE PDC SID CHANGE WAS DELIVERED IN A NONSTANDARD FORMAT (IN MY OPINION). WE WERE FLT PLANNED WITH THE SUMMA 6 DEP; TKOF ON RWY 34. WE WERE GIVEN THE SUMMA 6 ON PDC; THEN 'CLRED AS FILED' (./.); BUT THAT WAS CHANGED IN THE COMMENT SECTION; PAGE 2; TO THE SEATTLE 3 DEP. WE FAILED TO NOTICE THIS COMMENT. WE FLEW THE SUMMA 6; TURNED AT 8 DME TO A 070 DEG HDG. AT ABOUT THE SAME TIME; THE CTLR GAVE US A 090 DEG HDG. THE CTLR NOTICED WE WERE ALREADY IN THE TURN AND ASKED US WHICH SID WE WERE ASSIGNED. AFTER CHKING AND RECHKING THE PDC; WE FINALLY REALIZED OUR MISTAKE. THE CTLR INFORMED US THERE WERE NO CONFLICTS. OPS MANUAL STATES THAT CLRNC DELIVERY 'CAN USE ADDITIONAL FREE TEXT FIELDS' TO ADD INFO SUCH AS 'CALL 10 MINS PRIOR' OR TO 'ADD AN EDCT (FLOW OR RELEASE TIME).' NOTHING ABOUT RTE CHANGES IN THE 'FREE TEXT FIELD.' IN REGARDS TO ANY CHANGES TO THE FILED RTE; IT STATES THAT '...BOTH THE ORIGINALLY FILED RTE AND THE REVISED RTE WILL BE DISPLAYED ON THE PDC PRINTOUT. THE NEW RTE WILL BE ANNOTATED USING DASHES ('-') BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER THE NEW RTE....' OUR PDC PRINTOUT LOOKED LIKE THIS: 'PAGE 1: SEA MD83/W P 1753 429 330 SEA SUMMA 6 SUMMA LKV ./. LAS -- PAGE 2: SEATTLE 3 DEP MAINT 9000 EXP REQ ALT 15 NM AFTER TKOF ETC.' OBVIOUSLY IN HINDSIGHT WE SHOULD HAVE NOTICED THE SEATTLE 3 IN THE COMMENT SECTION. NEITHER OF US WERE RUSHED. NEITHER OF US WERE CUTTING CORNERS. THERE WERE NO DISTRS. I FEEL LIKE I WAS GIVING ALL DUE DILIGENCE TO DO A SAFE AND CONSERVATIVE JOB. WE BOTH SAW THE SUMMA 6; WHICH I HAVE FLOWN ALMOST EVERY TIME I HAVE EVER FLOWN NBOUND ON RWY 34 AND WHICH WE HAD FILED ON OUR CLRNC PAGE AND; MOST IMPORTANTLY; WE BOTH SAW THE 'CLRED AS FILED' SLASH MARK BELOW IT (LKV ./. LAS); AND NO DASHES. I GUESS THAT SETTLED THE ROUTING CLRNC IN MY MIND. THAT DOESN'T EXPLAIN MY NOT READING THE COMMENT LINE; EXCEPT SUBCONSCIOUSLY; I SUPPOSE; I FELT THE CLRNC WAS ESTABLISHED ON PAGE 1 AND I JUST WENT STRAIGHT TO WHAT I EXPECTED NEXT WHICH WAS THE 'MAINTAIN 9000 FT...ETC.' IT IS MY RECOLLECTION; AND IT IS SUPPORTED BY MY READING OF THE FOM THAT SID CHANGES ARE TO BE PLACED BTWN RTE CHANGE 'DASHES.' IF SID'S ARE EXEMPT FROM THIS REQUIREMENT; THEN MAYBE THAT SHOULD BE EXPLAINED IN THE FOM. IF THEY ARE NOT; THEN SEA CLRNC SHOULD MAKE IT SOP TO PLACE THE SID BTWN THE DASHES TO ASSIST US IN RECOGNIZING IMPORTANT CHANGES TO OUR RTE OF FLT. THAT IS WHY THE DASH FORMAT IS USED; I ASSUME. SINCE VERBAL LANGUAGE IS NOT USED; MISUNDERSTANDING OF TEXT IS MINIMIZED BY ALWAYS PLACING CHANGES BTWN THE DASHES; AND NOT IN SOME OTHER PLACE IN THE PDC. THAT BEING SAID; I MISSED THE TEXT LINE; AND FOR THAT I FEEL PROFOUNDLY STUPID. I HAVE ALWAYS FELT I TAKE MY TIME READING THE PDC AND TO MISS A CLR LINE OF TEXT LIKE THAT IS PERPLEXING. I WILL RE-DEDICATE MYSELF TO READING THE PDC SLOWLY LINE BY LINE. I WOULD REQUEST THAT ALL RTE CHANGES FROM ATC BE PLACED BTWN THE DASHES TO CALL ATTN TO THE CHANGE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.